About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
CSPAN 6
CNBC 1
CNNW 1
CSPAN2 1
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 12
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
to witness the vote. the united states, israel and other western countries oppose this move by the palestines. palestinians. more than a dozen european countries are supporting this rez lug. the uk says it may vote yes pending a couple of conditions. the u.s. has supported a two-state resolution for palestinians and israelis. why do american officials oppose u.n. recognition? >> for the most part it won't give the palestinians what they want, which is an actual state. this vote is largely symbolic. it would have no effect on the palestinian sovereignty or borders or any of the things they're looking for. israel is vehemently opposed to this vote. it said it threatened to cut off aid to the palestinians, impose new checkpoints if they do so. what the u.s. is fearing here is that if this vote goes ahead, and we see that it's pretty much a guarantee that it will -- that the palestinians will be upgraded at the u.n., basically it's not going to lead to anything good on the ground. what the u.s. is afraid of is that it will lead to more violence if the palestinians don't see their state actually r
, and rages on for a second day. palestinian militants bombarded israel with more than 20 rockets at borders yesterday. renewed violence started saturday, militant first fired a missile at israeli patrols and responded with shelling and israeli prime minister says he's prepared to strike even harder if they do not stop attacking israel. and new overnight a massive explosion at a-- in an indianapolis neighborhood. at least one person killed, two others hurt and the blast sent debris flying into homes, waking people out of their sleep. >> it looked like a war zone. i mean, one of my neighborhoods said there was someone in the house, and they were in the basement. they were able to get him out. but they got us out and evacuated the whole neighborhood, so it's pretty bad. >> about 200 people were taken to a nearby elementary school. 200 homes destroyed. others damaged. no word what caused that explosion. and frightening moments for 130 people on board a southwest airlines plane as it slid off the runway at denver international airport at oakland last night. bad weather may have been a factor sin
as egypt's president expands his power on the heels of helping to broker a ceasefire between israel and hamas. >>> new egyptian leader, same old story for the u.s. relationship? good morning from washington. it's monday, november 26, 2012. this is "the daily rundown." i'm chuck todd. welcome back from the long break. let's get right to my first reads of the morning. congressional leaders return to washington this week and with just 36 days left to avert the so-called fiscal cliff becoming more apparent that senate republicans want a deal and they would like one pretty quick. but while there may be a bi-p t bipartisan consensus to raise taxes on the wealthy, the sides are still far apart on where the revenue will come from. staff level negotiations are a little bit more than stalled. not fully stalled but they didn't go so great last week and it's unclear where speaker boehner will get the votes for a deal that would raise tax rates. which is why he's pushing against that idea. two senate republicans up for re-election in 2014 have bucked norquist saying they are willing to let taxe
of israel that israel has conducted a military action killing a senior hamas leader. an air strike in the gaza area killed the head of the hamas military. one of the things a number of traders heard about that earlier but one thing is an israeli military spokesman says this is the start of a broader operation. so that is one of the things. it seems to have the market a little bit on edge and has them bidding up oil at this hour. the one trader i talked to said between the tensions between israel and hamas if we'll see that spiking up obviously israel and syria over the last few weeks, that's better than israel and iran. back to you. >> that's true. bertha, thank you very much for that. congratulations if you are hold cisco shares coming into this session. they are experiencing a good bump on last night's results. we'll talk about what they are doing right and whether risks lie ahead next on the program and who would be affected the most if we go over the fiscal cliff? we'll get up close and personal with the cliff and as we head toward the break, another fiscal cliff fact. >> if la
what the middle east peace deal is going to be. that is a matter between israel and the palestinians, and the u.s. can nudge and between and all of that. but in the end, if netanyahu and the palestinians are not in the position to bring resolution to this, then at it is not really going to be something that president obama can do. certainly something he would like very much to do. netanyahu -- i mean, now that the election is over, i think we will see prime minister netanyahu have a recalculation of the relationship with obama and how it has to go forward. it has not been close in the previous four years. it has been pragmatic and grudgingly accepting a reality on both sides, but there is an opportunity for that to change. host: do you have thoughts on that, scott? guest: just a follow-up. netanyahu had a personal relationship with romney and was a very secret about who he wanted to win the election and that was not president obama, who applied quite a bit of pressure to israel in his first term to try to secure a peace deal called israel settlements in the west bank. israel felt sor
to be. that is a matter between israel and the palestinians, and the u.s. can nudge and between and all of that. but in the end, if netanyahu and the palestinians are not in the position to bring resolution to this, then at it is not really going to be something that president obama can do. certainly something he would like very much to do. netanyahu -- i mean, now that the election is over, i think we will see prime minister netanyahu have a recalculation of the relationship with obama and how it has to go forward. it has not been close in the previous four years. it has been pragmatic and grudgingly accepting a reality on both sides, but there is an opportunity for that to change. host: do you have thoughts on that, scott? guest: just a follow-up. netanyahu had a personal relationship with romney and was a very secret about who he wanted to win the election and that was not president obama, who applied quite a bit of pressure to israel in his first term to try to secure a peace deal called israel settlements in the west bank. israel felt sort of hard-done by a lot of this bit of the a
to egypt. right now egypt is threatening israel. egypt is threatening the region because of the arabs spring. we have to rethink the dollars we're spending the egypt. we have to say these dollars are for maintaining a security and a piece. if you are not participating, you do not get them. we have to continue our commitment in foreign policy to israel. israel is our strongest ally. it is our sister country. we need to do everything we can to fulfil our commitment. the military aides we still is a real is that right here in america. when you look at the arab spring, there was a lot of hope that this would be continuing democracy, and we're falling into what has become not secular governments, but religious governments, and we need to be gathering up all of our allies and be making a firm statement that this region needs to be statement -- stabilized. we need to protect the people who serve and our state departments, not in all facets, whether ngo's the state department. it cannot procure them, they should not be there. >> i would like to redirect this back to the representative. he spo
their strong support for the state of israel. i wouldn't say every mailing we sent out, but just about every mailing that we sent out mentioned either obama removing jerusalem as the capital of israel from his platform and then belatedly reinserting it, or it mentioned his call for israel to return to '67 borders, or it mentioned the fact that his administration had slow-walked sanctions against iran. and those issues have real resonance among pro-israel evangelicals. >> jonathan saw hasn't is one of washington's most thoughtful journalists. he's been covering this sector for a long time, and thank you, ralph, for your comments. he is the money and politics reporter for bloomberg, and he's also the past president of the national press club. what did you see yesterday, and what does it mean for the country? >> well, in 2010 we saw all this secret money into the races, and the republicans took control of the senate and the house, and all observers said this is just going to be a foreshadowing of 2012. it wasn't. obama was able to raise as much money as romney. romney had help with some of the
one nation that we should be nation-building with, and that's israel. because israel -- israel is -- that's god's chosen land. the jews are god's chosen people. host: ok, connie, let's give fred barnes a chance to comment. guest: well, i mean that was an issue between romney who was much more pro israel though publicly in particular. we'll see how that turns out. i personally don't begrudge him a vacation after the campaign, like to take one myself. but there was another part -- oh, yeah. what she said in the beginning about the republican party. is it really in deep trouble? i don't think so. obviously hispanics are a problem. younger senators and governors, they have 30 governors who are extremely important, 30 out of 50. like bob mcdonald in virginia and bobby jindal and scott walker in wisconsin and so on. republicans actually -- romney actually won i believe the middle class. if you have the middle class as people who make between $50,000 a year and $100,000 a year, romney won that group narrowly. the middle class is up for grabs but romney did well enough there but just n
in the " the new york times"about the back and forth between israel and hamas. in "the washington post." good morning from washington, d.c. on the democrats in line. i voted -- will survive before the bush cuts which were temporary. perhaps this should only be extended 50% instead of 100%. i think the republicans won the house. they both want something. i think they both need to work together and the constituents of both should pay a little more. that is how i feel. host: do you think yesterday both sides expressed a willingness on both parts? caller: i hope they realize the important thing is solving the crisis, not taking care of their particular constituents a lawn. host: let's hear from one more call. this is herman on the republican line. caller: yes, i want to say just because you are on a runaway train for the last 40 years -- we went through a great depression and came through it just fine. republicans and democrats both do not have the ability to solve this problem we are in. they are smart people, do not get me wrong. we need to go over the fiscal cliff for the good of the country.
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)